On Thu, Nov 02, 2000 at 01:00:13PM -0700, Tim Riker wrote: > This started off with some comments from the group (hpa in particular) > that even between gcc releases, the gcc extensions have been much less > stable that the standard compiler features. The danger of implementing Given how the thread started I'm uncertain if with "stable" he meant "bug-free" or "same API". You certainly mean "same API" and I see your point, OTOH supporting gcc extensions still looks like the best solution to me - even if we lack the standardization - because: 1) if you try to change the kernel I think you'll get even more mainteinance troubles :), 2) the stable kernels never get compiled with the bleeding edge gcc, so you would have plenty of time to catchup any potential change in the gcc extensions. Andrea - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-... Kai Henningsen
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-... Jes Sorensen
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-... Tim Riker
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-... Richard B. Johnson
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-... David Lang
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-... Richard B. Johnson
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-... Andi Kleen
- Re: non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
- Re: non-gcc linux? Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
- Re: non-gcc linux? Andrea Arcangeli
- Re: non-gcc linux? D. Hugh Redelmeier
- Re: non-gcc linux? Jeff Garzik
- Re: non-gcc linux? D. Hugh Redelmeier
- Re: non-gcc linux? (was Re: Where did kgcc go in 2.4.0-... Aaron Sethman
- Re: non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
- Re: non-gcc linux? Alan Cox
- Re: non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
- Re: non-gcc linux? Jakub Jelinek
- Re: non-gcc linux? Tim Riker
- Re: non-gcc linux? Marc Lehmann